Evening Standard Comment: A royal son, and what he means for Britain

Published: 23 July 2013

Updated: 13:19, 23 July 2013

The birth of a baby is an occasion for happiness in any family. And the birth of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s son is for them and their families a happy private event. But it is also a cause of general celebration for most people in the country. The baby will be the heir to the throne, third in line of succession. People feel genuine cheer about this little boy because in a sense he belongs to us all: one day, God willing, he will be head of state and, unless things change radically in coming years, head of the Church of England.

Royal births, like royal marriages and funerals, are a projection of fundamental rites and institutions on the national stage. In celebrating these events we mark their importance for all of us. And we would hope that every child born in the country today will have the same care and love from those around it that the royal baby will enjoy, for these are things of greater importance to happiness than status and privilege.

His birth has, of course, made the fuss about amending the constitution redundant. By virtue of being a boy, the anxieties over whether Prince William’s first-born would in fact succeed, if a girl, no longer hold. Once, the sex of a royal baby was a matter of all-consuming importance: in the case of Henry VIII’s wives, a matter of life and death. This baby boy is welcome but so would a girl have been. His birth makes the continuance of monarchy more likely: the popularity of the royal family will be bolstered by a small new addition to it. The infant is, unawares, a sign of continuity for an institution that most people in Britain hold in high regard.

But he also represents change. By virtue of his mother’s background he shows that the monarchy is, if hardly a classless institution, at least a more inclusive one. His middle-class mother and her parents, who acquired their money by their own work, are very different from any previous royal spouses and in-laws. And the great thing is that if this matters at all, it is as a positive development.

The little boy will also cheer up the nation; he will, like the marriage of his parents, make people happy, give strangers cause to exchange views on the event and quite a few to raise a glass in the pub. His christening will be a public celebration. And, in coarse economic terms, the birth will give a welcome boost to the economy: sales of commemorative teatowels and china mugs — at least some of them made in Britain — will, we hope, soar.

The monarchy does not in theory depend on the popularity of the royal family to survive but the reality is that its continuance does depend very much on the affection in which the members of that family are held.

The Queen enjoys enormous respect because of her rigorous sense of duty, her discretion and her sheer longevity. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge too are widely liked because they seem both dutiful and unaffected; they have carried out their public functions with grace and good humour. Now there will be a further element to their popularity, in that many people will identify with their role as parents. Not many people embark on parenthood in the blaze of publicity to which the couple are exposed but they are at least used to it.

The Queen is now a great-grandmother: not quite the matriarch that Queen Victoria was, but going strong. She can take satisfaction in the thought that the monarchy is even more stable today, with the succession marked out for another generation.

We, like our readers, wish the duke and duchess well, and the baby the blessings of long life and happiness.